THE SUMMIT News From and For The Washington GIS Community WAURISA The Washington State Chapter of URISA – The Association for GIS Professionals

WINTER 2011 WWW.WAURISA.ORG ISSUE 22

ALSO IN THIS ISSUE: Making the Leap from GIS to IT Management ..………….... p. 2 CWU GIS Day Activity…..………………………….………..….…... p. 3 Book Review: Chaos Cave ……………………………….….……… p. 5 2010 Dick Thomas Competition ……………..………………..…. p. 6 URISA GIS Capability Maturity Model …………………………. p. 10 Opinion Page ……………………………….……….……..……….. p. 19

OPENING THE GIS DATA VAULT: KING COUNTY PUBLISHES ITS GIS DATA TO A PUBLIC PORTAL By George Horning

The term “open government” has become a catch phrasein recent years. Generally it applies to the concept thatgovernment at all levels should be transparent, accountable,and fully enable public participation. The passage in 1966 ofthe Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) might be viewed as themodern genesis of the idea of open government. However, itis the near universal adoption of the Internet, a nascenttechnology of the 1960’s that has provided a communicationplatform to open the doors of government and engage withthe public in a manner never before possible. And in whatseems to have occurred in the blink of an eye, the applicationof social media by government agencies has created animmediacy to further close the gap to interaction with thepublic. It is these technologies which have pushed us beyonda mere acceptance of the concept of open government, to atipping point where it is assumed, if not mandated, that we willdo all we can to make government transparent and accessible.

Case in point, King County. In early 2010, the MetropolitanKing County Council passed an ordinance “relating toestablishing a requirement for the county to strive to publishexisting, high-value data sets appropriate for public access ona single website.“ The ordinance cites a handful of cities thathave already done so, including Seattle, and mentions howdata provided by those cities is being used to create web andmobile applications that benefit the public. Also mentioned inthe ordinance is the Open Government Directive of the federalgovernment (notable in that it was issued on the first full dayof the current administration), which requires all federalagencies to release high-value data sets. The text of the King County ordinance continues by comparing data to documents,making the distinction that data in an information system isstructured in a manner that allows it to be analyzed and usedin new ways. The expectation expressed in the ordinance isthat by providing access to county data it will lead toinnovation in how the data are used and in how the publicinteracts with government, resulting in social and economicbenefits to the county.

See: King County GIS Data Portal, page 3

PRESIDENT’S COLUMN Happy New Year to my GIS friends and colleagues! As

we say goodbye to 2010 and look forward to a new year for 2011 perhaps I can inspire you to become more involved with us at Washington URISA. We have an excellent core of energetic GIS professionals looking forward to collaborating with you with that volunteer opportunity that earns you some of those GISP points. Or perhaps it is stimulating you through one of our workshops or our annual conference. Either way we look forward to working with you as a volunteer or active attending member throughout the year.

As an organization we have several activities scheduled and in progress that we hope you will be able to take advantage of. Plans for our big annual Washington GIS Conference, May 9-11, 2011 at the Lynnwood Convention Center, are coming together nicely. Abstract and poster announcements will be coming out soon so now is the perfect time to start thinking about that notable project or map you have created to share with your GIS colleagues. Our website (www.waurisa.org) will be updated with the latest conference information as it is available so visit often for the latest news.

We are also offering two workshops this spring on March 14-15, 2011 at the Yakima County administration building in Yakima, Washington. We are happy to be able to offer workshops in closer proximity to our Eastern Washington members but we hope that all members will be able to take advantage of the opportunity. We will be offering the URISA GIS Program Management workshop on Monday March 14, 2011 and the Cartography workshop on Tuesday March 15, 2011 (see page 6). Both workshops will be taught by Washington URISA Vice President Greg Babinski, GISP. Greg is also the President Elect of URISA International so this is a great opportunity to sharpen your GIS management skills and discuss topics in a regional and national context. Registration will be open very soon so check our website for more details or to register.

See: President’s Column, Page 5

THE SUMMIT 2 WINTER 2011

MAKING THE LEAP FROM A GIS TO AN IT MANAGEMENT CAREER By Linda Gerull, Pierce County

After 15 years as Pierce County’s Geographic Information System (GIS) Manager and a year as the County’s Information Technology (IT) Director, Summit Editor Greg Babinski recently asked if I would write about the differences between the jobs of a GIS Manager and an IT Director. Is being a GIS Manager a good career step for becoming an IT Director? Does GIS prepare you for the rigors of the IT industry? The answer to both questions is a definite YES. I will share with you how my GIS career prepared me for my new role as IT Director and how the roles are different. I will also comment on the upcoming challenges and opportunities for both GIS and IT professionals.

When I applied for the IT Director position at Pierce County, I was very clear about how my experience as a GIS Manager would ensure my success as an IT Director. During my interview, I expected that the interview panel would not fully understand the multi-faceted role of a GIS Manager. So I pointed out which GIS job skills would bring the most value to the IT Director position and these included:

• A strong understanding of technology: GIS professionals have a deep understanding of software, data, and systems as well as hardware architectures, networks and mobile devices. GISers have experience with the complexities of tiered servers, large database management and 3rd party software systems. Another important skill is integration – GISers who have integrated mapping systems with other business systems to enable data analysis can master other system integrations. Unlike other technologists, GISers have an in-depth knowledge of corporate information which comes from creating, analyzing and mapping corporate data and this is essential when designing enterprise-wide systems.

• Broad business knowledge: How many different types of business data have you analyzed or mapped? Most GIS professionals have experience with a wide array of business sectors and industries and see the “big picture” of how the organization can use GIS. Law enforcement, environmental, transportation, health, land management, elections, utilities and emergency management are all business sectors where GIS has provided real value. The diversity of this business knowledge allows GISers to correctly design and apply technology to a business problem and achieves strategic benefit for the organization.

• Partnerships: Every GIS professional is an expert in building partnerships. Whether creating data sharing partnerships to reduce data redundancy or building multi-departmental partnerships to complete a complex data analysis, a GISer can manage the dynamics and business of partnerships. For an IT Director position, any experience with cross agency partnerships, contributing to regional councils/projects, supporting regional initiatives and providing technical expertise at business conferences (education, health, law enforcement) is valued skill.

A GIS Manager’s job is excellent preparation for the

duties of an IT Director. • Economical System Solutions: A common

conversation at any GIS conference is “how to do more with less”. Even before the economic downturn, GIS programs/staff were rarely funded at a sufficient level which forced GIS managers to be creative and efficient. Software and hardware had to perform multiple purposes and every database was optimized for an enterprise deployment. A GISers’ advanced skill at finding or creating economical solutions and maximizing value from a reduced budget is a unique talent.

• Communicating Value: Can you recite the top 5 benefits of GIS technology? How about 10 or 20? GIS professionals spend a considerable amount of time educating and marketing the technology to business users. Drawing diagrams on white boards, creating a simple definition of GIS, showcasing complex analysis in an easy to understand map, advocating for GIS database construction or demonstrating new modeling software, requires expert communication skills. GISers practice these important skills every day, which is excellent preparation for the IT Director’s job of promoting technology benefits and justifying strategies at a corporate level.

A GIS Manager’s job is excellent preparation for the duties of an IT Director. The difference in the roles is scale – every aspect of a GIS Manager’s job is multiplied by 10 at the IT Director’s level. If you get 30 emails a day as a Manager, you will get 300 a day as Director. Managing a GIS department’s budget of $2 million will increase to managing an IT budget of $20 million. In addition to knowledge of GIS, future IT Directors should be prepared with an understanding of the other technologies used by the organization such as imaging, records management, financial systems, client relationship management (CRM), and any special technology/equipment. From the IT perspective, a broader scope of technologies to management means there are more vendors to manage. Skills in vendor management, contracts, licensing agreements, RFP writing, negotiating, working with attorneys and project management are important and necessary experience at the IT Director level.

Looking ahead to 2011, I believe there are similar challenges facing GIS and IT professionals. We must keep up with the increasing speed of technology changes (new widgets) without increasing budgets. Our users desire business systems comprised of phones, iPads, cloud computing, self-serve apps, social media and open source. The image of instantaneous technology from slogans such as “there’s an app for that” or “take it to the cloud” creates higher user and management expectations. We are challenged to:

• Understand every new technology, evaluate possible impacts and quantify benefits before users fall in love with the new widget. Ensuring you have good sources for technology reviews will keep you ahead.

See: Leap From GIS to IT Management, Page 3

THE SUMMIT 3 WINTER 2011

KING COUNTY GIS DATA PORTAL Continued from page 1

It is natural for GIS to play an important role in open government/open data initiatives. After all, it is often stated that most government data is spatial, and there is no better technology than GIS to facilitate the flow of spatial information and knowledge. It is technology that reduces the friction of converting largely unintelligible raw data that is available to only a few, into information that is useful, understandable, and transmittable to a broad audience. But let us do not assume GIS tools were always adaptable to the requirements of open data, nor were government institutions holding GIS data necessarily ready to willingly embrace the concept of open government.

In the early days of GIS, data were compiled and stored in a manner only trained GIS professionals could deal with, and the GIS tools of that era required extensive training in order to be used. In time it became possible to develop applications to allow non-GIS professionals to interact with the spatial data in a structured way, usually in the context of a specific business need. Eventually the GIS tools became easier to use and the GIS data structures evolved to become standard and mainstream. A technical barrier had been crossed and it was now possible to widely disseminate GIS data to an audience able to consume it. But there were institutional barriers to cross as well tending to keep GIS data within the walls of government offices, accessible only through the filtered views we allowed. For some in government GIS data were too valuable to just release for free. For others there was concern the data would be misused. For still others there was the notion they needed to serve as intermediaries and interpreters, benignly shielding the public from the raw data. It has taken longer to overcome the institutional inertia, but we have good examples to now follow and many of us have finally embraced the open government ideal and essentially said; “What the heck, let them have our data.”

“What the heck, let them have our data.”So how did we at King County GIS approach the

open data mandate presented to us by our council? First of all let me say we were already following the national trend towards open data and had formed a work group to pursue a solution. As the ordinance passed we were in the process of researching the principles and best practices of open data (Joshua Tauberer has an excellent and detailed article on that topic and the sidebar to this article presents a good summary from another source), and we were visiting the websites of government data portals and talking about what we liked and disliked.

In the weeks that followed we continued our efforts by checking with GIS data stewards at various King County agencies to make decisions about what data could be published for public consumption, and we developed a list of requirements based on our findings.

See: King County GIS Data Portal, Page 5

LEAP FROM GIS TO IT MANAGEMENT Continued from page 2

• Find the time to learn the new technology and resolve the technical complexities of integrating the devices/system into the enterprise in a secure and stable manner. Continued staff training will shorter learning curves so don’t cut training budgets. Delivering technology faster may require changes to system delivery and customer service.

• Add new technology without a corresponding budget increase. The new widget may not replace (or turns off) an existing technology so existing systems must become more efficient (less costly to manage) in order to fund new widgets. Find efficiencies in operations with technologies such as virtual servers which can help control capital costs.

• Communicate technical realities when vendors tout ease of use. Using real world examples with quantified benefits and timelines will help dispel unrealistic expectations. Use multiple formats (blogs, intranet, videos, training, technology workshops) to get the message out.

• Educate the organization on technology’s total cost of ownership and create an” investment” perspective for each technology project. Every new system adds to the organization’s technology portfolio and increases costs associated with availability, recoverability, and sustainability.

It is an exciting time to be in the technology industry and these challenges are opportunities for the GIS and IT professional to build new skills and innovate. With a strong understanding of technology, broad business knowledge, partnerships, economical system solutions and ways to communicate value, GISers have the skills and are well prepared to address these challenges and pioneer new best practices. I look forward to learning about your ideas and success at the next Washington GIS Conference.

Linda Gerull lgerull@co.pierce.wa.us

CWU GEOGRAPHY PROGRAM VISITS MIDDLE SCHOOL FOR GIS DAY ACTIVITY

Six people from the Central Washington University Geography Program (Dr. Jen Lipton, David Cordner, Kristin Winter, Mark Thompson, Chris Hilferty, and Jamie Sheahan) taught 6th graders from Morgan Middle School how to use GIS on GIS Day!

CWU & Morgan Middle School Students Have Fun on GIS Day 2010

Thanks to Nancy Hultquist, retired Geographer from CWU and co-director of the NW Jobs for Geography list.

THE SUMMIT 4 WINTER 2011

The response to the King County GIS data portal has been very positive. Cities within the county are especially pleased they can download our data at any time, without having to contact us directly. And we are pleased because we can largely get out of the cumbersome business of manual data distribution. The deployment of the GIS data portal was an important step towards closing the gap between the information available to King County staff and that which is available to the public. We have yet to see a downside to having released our data in this manner, and we hope our GIS data portal serves a good example for the technical implementation of the principles of open government.

George Horning is the Manager of the King County GIS Center George.horning@kingcounty.gov

Open Government Data Principles Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below: 1. Complete - All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations. 2. Primary - Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms. 3. Timely - Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data. 4. Accessible - Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes. 5. Machine processable - Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing. 6. Non-discriminatory - Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration. 7. Non-proprietary - Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control. 8. License-free - Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed. Compliance must be reviewable. Definitions 1. “public” means: The Open Government Data principles do not

address what data should be public and open. Privacy, security, and other concerns may legally (and rightly) prevent data sets from being shared with the public. Rather, these principles specify the conditions public data should meet to be considered “open.”

2. “data” means: Electronically stored information or recordings. Examples include documents, databases of contracts, transcripts of hearings, and audio/visual recordings of events. While non-electronic information resources, such as physical artifacts, are not subject to the Open Government Data principles, it is always encouraged that such resources be made available electronically to the extent feasible.

3. “reviewable” means: A contact person must be designated to respond to people trying to use the data. A contact person must be designated to respond to complaints about violations of the principles. An administrative or judicial court must have the jurisdiction to review whether the agency has applied these principles appropriately.

Source: Open Government Working Group – hosted by O’Reilly Media and Public.Resource.Org – and sponsored by the Sunlight Foundation, Google, and Yahoo (December 2007)

KING COUNTY GIS DATA PORTAL Continued from page 1

We also fully participated with the county’s central IT group as they prepared to implement the council’s mandate, which resulted in using Socrata, a provider of open data platform solutions. The county’s Socrata website was launched last fall (www.datakc.org/). However, we continued to work towards our own solution because the Socrata site did not model well to the capabilities we had observed at other GIS data portals. So in the end we harnessed the capabilities of Mike Leathers, the county’s GIS data coordinator and Lisa Castle, one of our best web developers to create the King County GIS data portal (www5.kingcounty.gov/gisdataportal/).

To access data on the King County GIS portal users must accept our terms and conditions of use, and our data disclaimer. Once these have been accepted the user is presented with three data download options. Users can get all the data in one package, or choose data layers grouped into thematic categories, or pick individual layers from a list. Data format choices include shapefile, file geodatabase, and KML. All downloads are packaged as .ZIP files, and include the associated metadata and the use and disclaimer language. A handy feature of the layer list option is the ability to sort the list in a number of ways, including the date of last refresh for each layer. Sorting by date helps to quickly inform return users as to which data layers may have been updated since their last visit. The layer list also includes links to metadata for each layer, and a mouse over reveals a thumbnail map for the layer. Elsewhere on the download site are links to a couple of free GIS data viewers, as well as other resources for data and metadata. An automated process runs once a week to query our enterprise data warehouse and repackage data for the portal. There are currently over 140 layers on the portal with more being added nearly every week.

King County GIS Data Portal

King County is by no means the first government in the state of Washington to make their GIS data available for download. A number of state agencies, counties, and cities have been doing it for some time. A quick review of Washington counties found these offering some form of free GIS data download capability: Lincoln, Pend Oreille, San Juan, Pacific, Douglas, Kittitas, Franklin, Chelan, Grays Harbor, Island, Cowlitz, Skagit, Whatcom, Kitsap, Spokane, and Snohomish. My apologies if I missed anyone, but it appears at least 17 counties out of 39 (44%) provide GIS data downloads. Wow, who would have thought it would be that many?

THE SUMMIT 5 WINTER 2011

PRESIDENT’S COLUMN Continued from page 1

The International URISA organization has been working hard to reach out to its chapters and potential members with a fantastic one-time membership offer for 2011. Any WAURISA chapter member can become a URISA international member for just $20. This is a $155 savings over standard membership and is only available to new members of URISA. For more information please see the URISA web site at http://www.urisa.org/intro_membership . You are a member of Washington URISA if you attended the 2010 conference. If you did not attend the conference but would like to take advantage of the opportunity please let me know at president@waurisa.org. We are considering a dual membership offer so I would like to know if there is interest in that kind of opportunity.

Any WAURISA chapter member can become a URISA

international member for just $20.

A wonderful benefit of URISA members is access to many

of the URISA certified workshops. These workshops are held throughout the nation and can also be held right here in Washington. I would encourage anyone interested to browse through the possible workshops at http://www.urisa.org/workshops to see all the prospects. Many workshops may be available through the Pacific Northwest Education Center which is a cooperative partnership between URISA and the King County GIS Center. Workshops can also be offered directly through our chapter so and let me know at president@waurisa.org if any are particularly appealing so that we can possibly bring them here to the Pacific Northwest.

It has now been a little over a year and a half that I have served as president of Washington URISA. It has been a wonderful opportunity working with a remarkable, energetic group of dedicated volunteers leading a professional organization dedicated to such a varied, fascinating and ever changing profession. Nominations for president and other board positions will be open soon and I encourage anyone to contact our Past President and Nominating Committee chair Angela Johnson if they or a GIS friend should be nominated for a position. Elections will be held at the Washington GIS Conference in May. Thank you for the opportunity to serve as the Washington URISA chapter president.

Cheers, ‐ Don Burdick, President

Summit Book Review

CHAOS CAVE: A REVOLUTIONARY ADVENTURE By Lesley Downie Illustrated by Suharu Ogawa Redlands, CA: Lesley Downie, 2010, 210 pages. ISBN/EAN13: 1453791299 / 9781453791295

Reviewed by Tiffany Daniggelis, Meadowdale Middle School, Lynnwood, WA

Chaos Cave is about Josh and Mattie who are brother and sister who get transported back in time to the year 1775, during the Revolutionary War in Boston. Together they secretly use GIS technology to help their new friends in the fight against the red-coats. Meanwhile they have to run away from Archie, a man who wants to steal the ring that sent them back in time in the first place.

My favorite character in the book was Deborah Samson

because even though she had no idea who Josh and Mattie were, she put their strange looks aside and helped them get back home. She was brave, caring, and fought for everyone, not just for herself.

While reading Chaos Cave I learned a lot more about the Revolutionary War and the young people who played a big part in gaining America’s freedom. I also learned about how GIS helped Mattie and Josh help their friends by creating maps to show where the red-coats were stationed.

Chaos Cave was a pretty good book. It was fast paced at the end and I felt myself wanting to know if and how Mattie and Josh were going to get back home. One thing I didn’t like about Chaos Cave was how Mattie thought she knew best, so almost never let Josh share his own ideas without interrupting him.

You should read Chaos Cave if you want to learn more about the Revolutionary War without reading a giant textbook. You should also read Chaos Cave if you like historical fiction and adventure stories. To purchase Chaos Cave or to learn more about GIS for kids, visit: http://lesleydownie.com/.

THE SUMMIT 6 WINTER 2011

FOURTH ANNUAL DICK THOMAS MEMORIAL STUDENT PRESENTATION COMPETITION & AWARD AT THE 2010 WASHINGTON GIS CONFERENCE By Amanda Taub

WAURISA, the Washington State Chapter of the Urban and Regional Information Systems Association, held the fourth annual Dick Thomas Memorial Award on May 6, 2010 at this year’s Washington GIS Conference (May 4 – 6, 2010) at the Meydenbauer Center in Bellevue. WAURISA established this award to honor Washington State GIS pioneer and mentor, Richard ‘Dick’ Thomas by continuing his work of encouraging students to excel in their studies and transition successfully into GIS careers.

WAURISA’s goal with this award is to inspire students to present their original work related to GIS, geography, or geographic research in Washington State at the annual Washington GIS Conference. The competition comprised of two parts: the first was the selection of four (4) abstracts by the WAURISA Student Presentation Competition Committee. The second part was the judging of the 4 selected presentations during the Student Presentation Session at the 2010 Washington GIS Conference. Abstracts used a maximum of 300 words to describe the proposed presentations. The presentations were limited to 25 minutes, with an additional 5 minutes for questions.

The competition was limited to current students enrolled at least 6 hours in a relevant curriculum at a secondary school, community college, technical school, or university program. Submitters did not need to join WAURISA, but all students are encouraged to become WAURISA student members at a special student rate. Entries were the original work by the students, they conducted as school projects or under the supervision of a professor while enrolled in a GIS, geography, technology, or related academic program. Subjects for papers were related to geography, GIS, or an allied technology, as applied to natural resource, hazard mitigation, archaeology, animal habitats, energy, social, business, government, or other similar issues in Washington State.

Abstracts and presentations were judged on the following criteria:

• Demonstration of expertise and understanding of geographic concepts

• Demonstration of expertise and understanding of GIS, related technology, and its application

• Explanation of how the work presented relates to the topic and contributes to greater understanding or knowledge of the topic and GIS

• Demonstration of an innovative approach and/or critical thinking

• Quality of the written abstracts • Quality of the public presentations

This year’s entries: This year’s four entries presented an array of topics. Stephan

Gmur discussed his work in developing a GIS tool to look at large scale connectivity questions by identifying habitat connectivity networks based on stream network and core habitat characteristics.

Harry Rich, Jr., Dave Muller, Sage Miller, Sara Bloom, and Richard Lewis presented their work on spatial risk analyses to show the direct (planned/unplanned) and possible catastrophic effects of development that a proposed large-scale mine may have on the salmon populations and wildlife around Iliamna Lake in Bristol Bay, AK. Micah Babinski & Phil Murray spoke about their work on using statistical and geodemographic methods to evaluate Seattle’s bike lane implementation based on criteria of equity and efficiency. Kari Hiser, John Willard and Elaina Snyder discussed their project on the development, design and implementation of a wildlife habitat and corridor network map for the City of Mercer Island.

See: 2010 Dick Thomas Award, Page 7

Richard “Dick” Thomas

1947 – 2006

WAURISA BRINGING TWO URISA WORKSHOPS TO YAKIMA! Waurisa will be bringing two URISA Certified Workshops to Yakima in March. Greg Babinski and Don Burdick will be presenting:

GIS Program Management – Monday, March 14 (http://urisa.org/workshops/programmgmt)

Cartography and Map Design - Tuesday, March 15 (http://urisa.org/workshops/cartography)

Workshop location: Yakima County Technology Services Conference Room 217 N first street Yakima, WA 98901 Each class is offered for $150 ($125 for URISA or WAURISA members) Each student will receive a workbook and completion certificate.

For more information and to register, see: http://www.waurisa.org/education.html

THE SUMMIT 7 WINTER 2011

2010 DICK THOMAS AWARD Continued from page 6

First Place: Stephan Gmur Stephan Gmur is a student at the University of Washington.

His project was done under the guidance of Alex Fremier at the Geography Department of the University of Idaho. Stephan’s presentation was “As the fish swims: Improved habitat connectivity between wilderness areas using the river network”. Here is Stephen Gmur’s abstract:

Continuing changes in global climate and fragmented habitats hold unknown consequences for many species of wildlife. Current wilderness and other protected areas provide valuable habitat for many species that are predicted to migrate asynchronously across the landscape in response to changing habitat conditions [1 <]. This is of great conservation concern for areas surrounding wildernesses, including other protected areas, are rapidly being developed. Historically rivers and riparian areas provided connectivity across the landscape, yet today, record levels of human development, especially along river corridors, this functional role has significantly diminished. These changes have decreased connectivity of the wilderness landscape in unknown ways [2 <]. Scientific understanding of wildlife utilization of corridors has predominately been applied to overland terrestrial movement, leaving aquatic and semi-terrestrial connectivity relatively unknown [3 <]. The RiSLaR lab is developing a GIS tool to address large scale connectivity questions by identifying habitat connectivity networks based on stream network and core habitat characteristics. Implementation uses the geoprocessing framework of ArcGIS Desktop 9.3.1 using Python 2.5 with ArcToolbox. The stream network is modeled using Network Analyst, using NLCD and the National Inventory of Dams, capturing a travel cost per stream segment based on human development and infrastructure, providing a detailed representation of the theoretical resistance species will encounter. Questions that are addressed with the tool include: 1) Which wilderness areas are the most disconnected on the existing landscape, based on aquatic, semi-terrestrial and terrestrial movement? 2) Where on the network would a newly protected area improve the overall reserve connectivity? 3) Where on the network are the areas predicted to see the largest changes in climate and concurrent influence by surrounding land development? 4) What wilderness areas will be most impacted by climate change due to high levels of habitat fragmentation through land use, dams or other human-related alterations?

See: 2010 Dick Thomas Award, Page 8

THE SUMMIT 8 WINTER 2011

2010 DICK THOMAS AWARD Continued from page 7

Works Cited 1. Prediction climate-induced range shifts: model differences and model reliability. Lawler, Joshua J, et al. 2006, Global Change Biology, Vol. 12, pp. 1568 - 1584. 2. Use of Riparian Corridors and Vineyards by Mammalian Predators in Northern California. Hilty, Jodi A and Merenlender, Adina M. 1, 2004, Conservation Biology, Vol. 18, pp. 126 - 135. 3. Faunal indicator taxa selection for monitoring ecosystem health. Hilty, Jodi and Merenlender, Adina. 2000, Biological Conservation, Vol. 92, pp. 185 - 197. Stephan’s award included: • Award Plaque • $1000 cash • One year membership in WAURISA • Free registration to the 2011 Washington GIS Conference • Publication of his paper in The Summit (Washington GIS

Newsletter) Stephan’s paper was published in the Summer 2010 issue of

The Summit. In addition, his professor, Alex Fremier, was awarded a cash prize of $500.

Stephan Gmur Accepts His 2010 Dick Thomas First Place Award

Check from Amanda Taub

Second Place: Harry Rich, Jr., Dave Muller, Sage Miller, Sara Bloom, and Richard Lewis

Harry Rich, Jr., Dave Muller, Sage Miller, Sara Bloom, and Richard Lewis, with the University of Washington Extension, GIS Certificate Program, presented “Iliamna Lake - Fish First Project: Sustainable fisheries and a proposed large-scale mine in Bristol Bay, AK”. Their advisor was Jaime Crawford.

Here is their abstract: The Pebble Mine project is a copper-gold-molybdenum porphyry deposit that is in the advanced exploration stage. The project is located in the Bristol Bay region of southwest Alaska, situated near the headwaters of two of the five main sockeye salmon river districts comprising the Bristol Bay commercial fishery. The Bristol Bay metapopulation is the world’s largest sustainably managed and commercially exploited run of wild sockeye in the world. The fishery has an average return of 30 million sockeye, with an ex-vessel value ranging between $100-200 million annually. The Bristol Bay region is home to the largest subsistence harvest of salmon in Alaska, with over 80% of subsistence harvest comprised of sockeye salmon. The region is also home to world class sport fisheries and unspoiled habitat for several species of wildlife. Pebble consists of two contiguous deposits, totaling 7.5 billion metric tons which will be removed, pulverized and disposed of.

The diffuse nature of the deposit will generate large amounts of waste rock and require the use of cyanide leaching procedures; toxic waste products will need to be retained in perpetuity. Tailings ponds will be created with a series of earthen dams over 700 feet high and 4 miles wide. Additionally, massive road and power generating projects need to be installed in this pristine wilderness. The University of Washington’s Fisheries Research Institute (FRI) and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADFDG) have been collecting data on the abundance and distribution of sockeye salmon throughout the region since the mid 1950’s. We built a geodatabase incorporating data on adult sockeye salmon abundance, distribution to spawning grounds, and juvenile rearing areas in the lake. We conducted spatial risk analyses to show the direct (planned/unplanned) and possible catastrophic effects this mine’s development may have on the salmon populations and wildlife around Iliamna Lake.

Their award included: • Award Certificates • $300 cash • One year membership in WAURISA • Free registration to 2011 Washington GIS Conference

Harry Rich Accepts His 2010 Dick Thomas Second Place

Award Check from Amanda Taub

Third Place: Micah Babinski & Phil Murray Micah Babinski & Phil Murray are students at the

University of Washington, in the Geography Department. Their advisor was Sarah Elwood. Their presentation was on “A Geodemographic and Statistical Analysis of Bike Lane Access in Seattle, WA”. Here is their abstract:

Much is known in the academic and urban planning communities about the benefits of active lifestyles and efficient transportation networks. The layout of the urban landscape has tremendous influence on the levels of walking, biking, and other alternative modes of transportation. Community-oriented coalitions such as Active Living by Design (ALbD) work to encourage urban planners and policy makers to implement projects aimed at increasing ‘walkability’ and access to bike lanes within Seattle and other major cities. This project uses GIS software and correlation testing to evaluate two demographic factors based on their predictive influence on bike lane access in Seattle.

See: 2010 Dick Thomas Award, Page 9

THE SUMMIT 9 WINTER 2011

2010 DICK THOMAS AWARD Continued from page 8

We gathered King County census information and tailored it to represent population and median income data for the census tracts of Seattle. We then performed a spatial join of Seattle bike lane data to the Seattle census tracts, allowing us to represent the percentage of total bike lane access for each tract. We calculated z scores for each tract representing per-tract variation in population, median income, and bike lane access. We performed two regression analyses based off of the z scores, to find the correlation coefficients for the associations between population and bike lane access, and between median income and bike lane access. Essentially, we used statistical and geodemographic methods to evaluate Seattle’s bike lane implementation based on criteria of equity and efficiency. We conclude that both median income and population have low to moderate associations with bike lane access, and that both associations are significant at a .05 significance level. We also observe that the correlation coefficient for median income is slightly higher than the coefficient for population. This study would be useful to groups like ALbD to determine which factors contribute to below-average levels of bike lane access in certain parts of the city.

Their award included: • Award Certificates • $200 cash • One year membership in WAURISA

Phil Murray and Micah Babinski Accept Their 2010 Dick Thomas Third

Place Award Check from Amanda Taub Honorable Mention: Kari Hiser, John Willard and Elaina Snyder

Kari Hiser, John Willard and Elaina Snyder are students at the University of Washington, Geography Department. Their advisor was Joe Brentin. They presented their work on “Mercer Island Certified Wildlife Habitat & Corridor Project”.

Here is their abstract: The objective of our GIS course project will involve the development, design and implementation of a wildlife habitat and corridor network map for the city of Mercer Island. Mercer Island is a community located on Lake Washington and connected to Seattle to the west and Bellevue to the east by Interstate 90. The boundaries of our project site will be contained within the island’s 6.2 square miles, with a primary focus on areas with current sustainable habitat and wildlife passages.

Our sponsor Rita Moore is a member of IslandVision, a nonprofit sustainability-focused organization on M.I., and the main project stakeholder. In addition to Moore, secondary stakeholders will include M.I. residents, IslandVision committee members, green businesses, developers, and other local cities interested in wildlife corridor preservation and habitat certification. The primary goal of our project will be to provide Moore and IslandVision with an electronic and hard copy map of potential and current M.I. corridor habitat. Our project deliverables will assist Moore and IslandVision with prioritizing public outreach efforts and certifying M.I. as a Wildlife Habitat Community. In order to receive certification, M.I. must meet a list of environmental standards provided by the National Wildlife Federation. In addition to the NWF list, we will use site observations, sponsor recommendations, and native species criteria to help prioritize our cost-analysis for both current and potential corridors. To develop our corridor map, we will build a geodatabase consisting of primary and secondary data layers. Some examples of primary layers will be DEM, drainage basin, stream network, soil type/erodability, and riparian maps of M.I. The secondary layers will include surface vegetation, zoning boundaries, and road maps. From our research, we will perform multiple cost distance and cost-benefit analyses to assess areas of current and future sustainable wildlife habitat.

Adam and Shelby’s award included: • Honorable Mention Certificates Every year the entries continue to be better and better.

This year was no exception. All of the students did a professional job of presenting their work. The future seems for these students and our profession.

I would like to send my heartfelt gratitude to everyone that made possible this year’s Dick Thomas Student Presentations and Award. I would like to thank this year’s entrants, Stephan Gmur, Harry Rich, Jr., Dave Muller, Sage Miller, Sara Bloom, Richard Lewis, Micah Babinski and Phil Murray, for the great work they demonstrated in their abstracts and quality presentations.

I would like to thank the judges, Marty Balikov with ESRI, Whitney Bowerman with Public Works Dept. at the City of Olympia and Rick Lortz with the Lakehaven Utility District for their work judging all of the abstracts and the presentations.

Finally, I would like to thank the professors who encouraged their students to enter the competition. These presentations would not have happened without your support.

The fifth annual Dick Thomas Memorial Student Presentation Competition and Award will be Wednesday, May 11, 2011 at next year’s Washington GIS Conference (May 9 – 11, 2011) at the Lynnwood Convention Center. Look for the upcoming announcement and guidelines!

Amanda Taub, GISP Dick Thomas Award Coordinator

THE SUMMIT 10 WINTER 2011

Managers usually know their GIS could benefit from

refinement, but funds, staff, or time for further development are difficult to acquire. Enhancements may be developed as part of GIS operations, but rarely on a systematic basis with a desired end state goal.

GIS Benchmarking Studies and Maturity Assessments Benchmarking studies compare an agency’s GIS with other

peer organizations. They can identify industry best practices, resource and service level imbalances, and process improvement areas. Because of the significant time and cost required, benchmarking studies are rare.

Maturity assessments are not well developed within the realm of local government GIS, but the National States Geographic Information Council (NSGIC) is developing a Statewide Geospatial Maturity Assessment (GMA).

Why Develop a Local Government GIS Capability Maturity Model?

An old management adage states: ‘You can’t manage what you don’t measure.’

For any local government GIS program, ROI increases as the process capability maturity level of the GIS staff increases.

If we accept this hypothesis, a GIS CMM can provide an indication of the ability of local agencies to realize the potential benefits from their GIS investments.

See: Proposed GIS Capability Maturity Model, Page 11

URISA PROPOSES A LOCAL GOVERNMENT GIS CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL By Greg Babinski, GISP

One Saturday shortly after moving into my first house, I awoke to hear a drip, drip, drip sound coming from the bathroom. ‘Honey,’ my wife said, ‘there’s a leak in the bathroom sink.’ ‘No problem,’ I replied, ‘I’ll git ‘er done right after breakfast,’ even though I had never repaired plumbing before.

Six hours later, after a bumped head, scrapped knuckles, and three trips to the hardware store for tools, fittings, and gaskets, I had ‘got er done’. The next time I had a leak the repair process went much faster, because I applied my previous experience.

I didn’t realize it, but I had just progressed through the first two stages of a process capability maturity model (CMM). My first effort was ad-hoc and chaotic. I progressed to a repeatable process, recalling and applying steps I used to fix the problem before.

Homeowners manage complex systems that provide shelter and safety, a means to store and cook food, and a place to rest, socialize, and recreate.

As local government GIS managers we operate and maintain systems that are more complex than our abodes, and that represent huge investments supporting a wide range of government business needs. The maturity level of our processes relate directly to the effectiveness of our GIS.

What is a Capability Maturity Model? A capability maturity model assesses an organization’s

ability to accomplish defined tasks. The CMM concept originated with the Software Engineering Institute (SEI), which published ‘Managing the Software Process’ in 1989, to assess software contractors’ ability to successfully complete large software development projects.

The CMM concept has since been applied to system engineering, project management, risk management, and information technology services.

A CMM assesses an organization’s maturity level based on how it executes individual processes. The maturity levels are usually defined as:

• Level 1 – Ad hoc (chaotic) process • Level 2 – Repeatable process – based on the previous

successful methodology • Level 3 – Defined process – successful processes are

documented to guide consistent performance • Level 4 – Managed process – documented processes are

measured and analyzed • Level 5 – Optimized process – defined and managed

processes are refined by on-going process improvement activities

GIS Development Life Cycle: When is GIS ‘Complete’? GIS development ideally progresses towards full maturity.

Often begun as a project to create the ‘best GIS possible’ with limited funds, GIS program development involves frequent compromises. Components of an ideal GIS program are often deferred to ‘go operational’ quickly and start delivering ‘return on investment’ (ROI) for the agency. The end of a GIS implementation project does not mean that the agency has a complete or mature GIS.

THE SUMMIT 11 WINTER 2011

PROPOSED GIS CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL Continued from page 10

Many of the processes that have had the CMM approach applied in the past are themselves components of GIS. It is useful to think about GIS operation in theoretical terms and then analyze and measure individual GIS operations against this ideal end state.

A GISCMM allows local GIS operations to gauge their capability and maturity against a variety of measures, including:

• A theoretical end state of GIS data, hardware, and software infrastructure

• A theoretical end state of GIS organizational development • The maturity of other peer GIS organizations, either

individually or collectively • The maturity of the subject organization over time • The maturity level of the organization against an agreed

target

URISA’s Proposed Local Government GIS Capability Maturity Model

URISA’s proposed model indicates progress by an organization towards GIS capability that maximizes the potential for the use of state of the art GIS technology, commonly recognized quality data, and organizational best practices appropriate for local agency business use. The URISA GISCMM assumes two broad areas of GIS development: enabling capability and process execution ability.

The GISCMM assumes that mature agencies have well developed enabling technology and resources, and that their processes maximize the effectiveness of their GIS infrastructure. Enabling capability includes technology components, data, professional GIS staff, organizational structure, and other resources and infrastructure. Execution ability is the competence of the staff to use the available capability and provides an indication of the potential for increased ROI.

For any local government GIS program, ROI increases

as the process capability maturity level of the GIS

staff increases.

The enabling capability assessment includes 21 components with a scale modeled after the NSGIC GMA. Because GIS enabling capability is dependent on resource availability, the GMA scale (with its resource-commitment focus) is well suited to indicate capability.

The execution ability assessment includes 14 components and is modeled after the typical CMM process-based five-level scale. Because the execution ability of a GIS depends on its process performance, the typical CMM assessment scale (with its focus on process execution) is well suited to indicate ability. See: Proposed GIS Capability Maturity Model, Page 12

THE SUMMIT 12 WINTER 2011

PROPOSED GIS CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL Continued from page 10

Current Activity and Next Steps URISA’s draft GISCMM was completed in 2009 by 12 counties

and 19 cities in Washington State. Results were presented at the 2009 URISA Annual Conference and at GIS conferences in Oregon and Washington in 2010. A three hour GISCMM workshop was held at GIS-Pro 2010 in Orlando. Feedback has been solicited and agencies invited to complete the assessment to expand the base of knowledge about the maturity level of local government GIS.

NSGIC has been informed of GISCMM development and there is interest in utilizing local agency GISCMM assessments to inform state level GMA’s.

The GISCMM was presented to the National Geospatial Advisory Committee (NGAC) in Washington, D.C., in September, 2010. NGAC is interested in development of metrics for the NSDI and sees potential for the GISCMM, the GMA, and COGO’s proposed National Geospatial Technology Report Card, to provide the means for measuring development of the NSDI.

The URISA Board has indicated support of further development of the GISCMM. Future refinement of the model itself is needed. A means of institutionalizing the model is needed. One suggestion is to use an approach similar to the Green Building Council’s LEED Certification program. For the GISCMM this might mean submission by local agencies of a portfolio with the self assessment, for a peer-based review process to certify an agency’s maturity level.

URISA is currently considering means of refining the model and developing recommendations for implementing it on a sustainable national basis.

To see the current version of the model, visit: http://tinyurl.com/GISCMM.

The two components of the GISCMM – Enabling Capability and Execution Ability – impact local agency GIS return on investment

More Information For more information, contact Greg Babinski, Finance & Marketing Manager, King County GIS Center, Seattle, WA (V: 206-263-3753; E: greg.babinski@kingcounty.gov). This article originally appeared in the Winter 2011 Issue of ArcNews

THE SUMMIT 13 WINTER 2011

THE SUMMIT 14 WINTER 2011

http://www.urisa.org/conferences/2011gis_cama

http://www.urisa.org/2011health_call

http://www.urisa.org/gis_transit

http://www.urisa.org/conferences/aboutgis-pro

WWW.URISA.ORG/ULA

2010 ULA Graduates, Baltimore, MD

Have you seen the new URISA Website? See: www.URISA.ORG

THE SUMMIT 15 WINTER 2011

THE SUMMIT 16 WINTER 2011

`

THE SUMMIT 17 WINTER 2011

THE SUMMIT 18 WINTER 2011

WWW.ESRI.COMH

UWWW.KINGCOUNTY.GOV/GISH

UWWW.ELECDATA.COMH

UWWW.GEOLINE.COMH

U WWW.SKAGITCOUNTY.NET/GIS H

UWWW.PACIFICAD.COMH

WWW.OPENGEO.ORG/

WWW.JUNIPERGIS.COM/

WWW.PICTOMETRY.COM

In addition to the paid sponsors listed on this page, WAURISA acknowledges support from the following agencies that provide chapter board members:

SAVE THE DATE

2011 WASHINGTON GIS CONFERENCEMapping Washington’s Future

May 9-11, 2011

Lynnwood Convention Center

• City of Bellingham

• Critigen

• City of Seattle

• ESRI

• Port Madison GIS

• Pierce County

• Wendt GIS

• King County GIS Center

WAURISA SPONSORS WAURISA thanks the following sponsors for their generous support….

THE SUMMIT 19 WINTER 2011

The Summit is published by WAURISA. To encourage the discussion of issues and ideas of importance to the Washington GIS community we welcome letters to the editor or opinion essays. Letters to the editor should be a maximum of 100 words and essays should be limited to 500 words.

Chief Editor: Greg Babinski Contributing Editor: Effie Moody Interview Editor Michelle Lortz Olympia Area Editor: Whitney K. Bowerman West Sound Area Editor: Eadie Kaltenbacher For subscriptions, content, comments, or suggestions, email: Summit@WAURISA.org

PUBLIC MAPS IN WASHINGTON This Sequim Visitor’s Map was discovered by a

Summit reader. With scale, compass rose, legend and inset map, it is also embellished around the margins with pictures depicting the beauty and bounties of the Sequim area.

'Photo courtesy of Starla Robinson-DeLorey/CREA Affiliates'   

Do you know of a public map display in Washington? Send it to The Summit and we’ll include it in a future issue. -Editor

______________________________________ THE SUMMIT – LITERARY CORNER

The Pilgrim’s Progress 'I saw then in my Dream, that they went on in this their solitary ground, till they came to a place at which a man is apt to lose his way. Now tho’ when it was light, their Guide could well enough tell how to miss those ways that led wrong, yet in the dark he was put to a stand; but he had in his Pocket a Map of all ways leading to or from the Cœlestial City; wherefore he struck a Light (for he never goes also without his Tinder-box) and takes a view of his Book or Map, which bids him be careful in that place to turn to the right - hand way. And had he not here been careful to look in his Map, they had all in probability been smothered in the Mud, for just a little before them, and that at the end of the cleanest way too, was a Pit, none knows how deep, full of nothing but Mud, there made on purpose to destroy the Pilgrims in.'

'Then thought I with myself, who that goeth on Pilgrimage but would have one of these Maps about him, that he may look when he is at a stand, which is the way he must take?'

The Pilgrim’s Progress, paras.722-723 (1678) from The Harvard Classics.

- John Bunyan

THE SUMMIT - EDITORIAL SUPPORT WASHINGTON’S GIS STRATEGIC AND BUSINESS PLANS

If you live and work in Washington State and pay any attention at all to the State’s finances, you know that we are in trouble. The Governor’s proposed 2011-2013 budget is faced with a $4.6 billion revenue shortfall. The proposed Department of Information Services budget (http://www.ofm.wa.gov/budget11/detail/nl155.pdf) shows a reduction of 27.8% and the loss of 161 jobs – from 464 to 283!

In the last issue of The Summit, we urged support for the funding and implementation of the State’s new Geographic Information Systems Strategic Plan and the companion Geographic Information Systems Business Plan (Summit, Issue 21, p. 19).

The Washington Chapter of URISA took up this call. The WAURISA Board voted to support funding and implementation (see: http://www.waurisa.org/newsevents.html). WAURISA sent letters of support to the Governor, her Chief of Staff Jay Manning, and key house and senate committee chairs (see page 16). WAURISA contacted other professional organizations with an interest in GIS development within Washington State to ask for their support.

Now it is up to you. If you live and work in Washington State, if you believe in the value of GIS, and if you care at all about the use of GIS to make state government more effective and efficient – you need to act. What can you do?

First, educate yourself. Visit the State Budget web site: http://www.governor.wa.gov/priorities/budget/default.asp. It’s not pleasant reading, but it will ground you in reality. Then learn about the State’s GIS Strategic and Business Plans: http://wagic.wa.gov/2009GISPlanning/Default.htm.

At a minimum every member of the Washington GIS community should write, email, or call their state representative and senator, plus the Governor. Give them your views (pro or con) on the proposed GIS plans. Write a letter to the editor of your local newspaper. Talk to your family and friends and ask them to do the same.

These plans support development of the NSDI; reorganize and enhance the state’s GIS infrastructure, organization, capacity, and capability; and deliver direct benefits to local agencies, the private sector, and the general public. There is a growing body of evidence that investment in geospatial technology and dissemination of data and applications by government agencies delivers significant return on investment (ROI). Times are tough now in Washington State, with government agencies strapped for cash, unemployment still high, and businesses struggling. But adoption of the state’s GIS Strategic Plan and implementation of the Business Plan will provide significant broad ROI far in excess of the cost.

THE SUMMIT 20 WINTER 2011 WAURISA BOARD OF DIRECTORS

President: Don Burdick: Udburdick@cob.org Vice President Greg Babinski: Ugreg.babinski@kingcounty.govH Secretary Karl Johansen: emmasen@msn.com Treasurer Tonya Elliott: Tonya_Elliott@hotmail.com Past President Angela Johnson: Angela.Johnson@critigen.com Board Members At-Large:

Neil Berry: UNeil.berry@seattle.gov Whitney Bowerman: whitneykate@gmail.com Cort Daniel: Ucort.daniel@co.pierce.wa.us H Heather Glock: Uhglock@esri.com Donna Wendt: d_l_r_wendt@hotmail.com Ann Stark AStark@cob.org

WAURISA COMMITTEE VOLUNTEERS Marty Balikov: mbalikov@esri.comU Randy Bracket randyb@co.island.wa.us Daryn Brown: Daryn.Brown@ci.bothell.wa.us Dave Brown: daveb@ehsintl.com Chuck Buzzard: cbuzzar@co.pierce.wa.us Jaime Crawford: Jaime.crawford@ch2m.com Jennifer Cutler cutler.jennifer@nisqually-nsn.gov Starla DeLory: starla@deloreyworks.comU Mike Dana: mike@mdrmanage.com Melissa Faga: mfaga@redmond.gov Bryan Fiedor bfiedor@jsanet.com Byron Gessel: Byron_Gessel@RL.gov Holly Glaser: h.glaser@comcast.net Tami Griffin: griffit@wsdot.wa.gov Tony Hartrich: thartrich@quinault.org Eadie Kaltenbacher: ekaltenb@co.kitsap.wa.us Tom Kimpel tom.kimpel@ofm.wa.gov Jitka Kotelenska: Jitka.Kotelenska@CH2M.com Rick Lortz: rlortz@lakehaven.org Michelle Lortz: michelle@lortzco.com Reily Love: Reily@LoveGIS.com Effie Moody: effie.moody@seattle.gov Jill Oliver: joliver@perteet.com Chris Owen: cowen@ci.walla-walla.wa.us Steve Schunzel: Usschunzel@desmoineswa.govH Heather Spates: skits1995@gmail.com Lurleen Smith: lurleen@penlight.org Matt Stull: matts@co.mason.wa.us Amanda Taub U ataub_gis@yahoo.com Cathy Walker c.walker@emd.wa.gov Bob Wendt: rwendt@cityoftacoma.org Walker Willingham Walker.willingham@gmail.com

GIS USER GROUPS IN WASHINGTON ACSM – Washington State Section http://www.wss-acsm.org/

ASPRS Puget Sound Region http://www.photogrammetry.com/ASPRS-PSR/

CCascadia Users of Geospatial Open Source http://groups.google.com/group/cugos/ Contact Karsten Venneman at: karsten@terragis.net

Central Puget Sound GIS User Group http://waurisa.org/phpBB2/viewforum.php?f=24 Contact Nora Gierloff at: Ungierloff@ci.tukwila.wa.us

Central Washington GIS User Group Meets the 2nd Wednesday of each month. For information contact Amanda Taub at: ataub_gis@yahoo.com

King County GIS User Group http://www.kingcounty.gov/operations/GIS/UserGroups.aspx Meets 1st Wednesday every other month at 11:00am at the KCGIS Center, 201 S. Jackson Street, Seattle WA, Conf Room 7044/7045.

Northwest Washington GIS User Group http://www.acadweb.wwu.edu/gis/nwgis_mtgs.htm

Southeast Washington/Northwest Oregon GIS User Group For more information, contact Chris Owen: cowen@ci.walla-walla.wa.us

Washington Geographic Information Council (WAGIC) http://wagic.wa.gov/ Join Listserve at: http://listserv.wa.gov/archives/wagic.html

Washington Hazus Users Group http://www.usehazus.com/wahug Contact Cathy Walker at: c.walker@mil.wa.gov

To have your GIS related group or event listed in future issues of The Summit, notify the editor at: SummitGISNews@URISA.org. _________________________________________________________________________________________

To be added to The Summit mailing list, contact: USummit@WAURISA.org Back issues of The Summit are available at: Uhttp://waurisa.org/thesummit/ Interested in volunteering your time to help WAURISA? Contact Don Burdick or any Board member listed to the right.

WAURISA 1402 AUBURN WAY NORTH PBN 158 AUBURN WA 98002